I can't answer your question, but we have talked about belly buttons before, and I also found this for you.

omphalologist [link]: a physician whose specialty need not be identified (facetious; akin to calling an unknown product a "widget".) His specialty is omphalology.

You will be pleased to know that for 2002 the Ig-Noble Prize, given annually for scientific research that "cannot or should not be reproduced," was awarded for a survey on belly button lint. 4799 persons responded to that survey.

Well, I do thank you, Jerry and Hic, for humoring me and posting something here. It was late last night, and I was wanting to make a word post. However, I now realize this word post may get the prize for the worst post on the board! So sorry!

Anyway, to answer Jerry: Jerry, "gronk" is defined in my "There's a Word for It!" (~ Elster). While any author, online or published, can be wrong, I have been impressed by his work. The major sources he has relied upon are: Century Dictionary (1914); the second edition of the Oxford English Dictionary (1991); Webster's New International Dictionary, second edition (1934); Random House Dictionary of English Language, second edition, unabridged (1987); and the American Heritage Dictionary of the American Language, third edition (1992). The definition given in the book is: "a dialectal term for the dirt and scuzz that collects between your toes, colloquially known as cheese or toe-jam." However, I looked all through Google for that definition of "gronk" and didn't find it. So, it may not be accurate.

Now, I know that I have heard of that word for navel lint before, but I cannot remember it. However, I also realize that this isn't an important question!

As questions go, no, this isn't one of the more important but that doesn't mean it should go unanswered.

Navel lint? Sorry, no clue. But I do recall some celebrity from the 60's or late 50's (Orson Bean, maybe?) mentioning in an interview that there once was a Broadway showtune devoted to "nurr" (spelling totally uncertain but that's how it was pronounced) which this person explained was the technical term for lint that forms at the bottom of one's jacket pocket.

I had thought it might have come from "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying" but a google search there (not to mention the rest of the net using a variety of spellings) turned up nothing. The song wasn't exactly a major hit...

The worst of it is, I know I've seen that word before. I just can't remember where.

I tried to search for "nurr", as I thought I might get a hint for navel lint. However, I couldn't find it, either. Interestingly, the words "ner" and "nur" exist, but they don't mean lint at the bottom of a pocket. Now, that would be a useful term; I always remove the "nurr" before I do the wash.

quote:Originally posted by WinterBranch:I also found this which includes some different names for the belly button and some very interesting belly button related information.

This site contained a quote from The Troublesome Offspring of Cardinal Guzman:

"Don Emmanuel grinned, scratched his rufous beard and then his pubic region, and said, 'I will give you all the advice in the world if only you can tell me why it is that the dingleberries excavated from my navel by Felicidad are always composed of blue Lint, when I possess no clothes of that colour.' "

I've never before heard bellybutton lint called "dingleberries". Rather, I learned that dingleberries came from a different orifice!

The site also talks about bellybuttons and referred sensations (near the bottom of the page). Apparently some people feel a remote sensation when they touch their bellybuttons. How about you?

Ref that site, there is a major (to a nit-picker like me) error. All mammals do not have navels. I assume you can name the two that don't. (answer, if not tomorrow, soon)

Also, when I was young and still in the self-exploration stage, I discovered that if I poked myself too deeply in my navel, not only would it hurt but I would immediately feel deeply depressed. I can still recreate this sensation today but, not being of a psychologically masochistic frame of mind, rarely do.

quote:Originally posted by C J Strolin:All mammals do not have navels.

As a fellow nitpicker, I must tell you that the above statement is not true. Some mammals do have navels. Now, if you had said, "Some mammals do not have navels" or "Not all mammals have navels", then I could agree with you.

quote:Originally posted by tinman:As a fellow nitpicker, I must tell you that the above statement is not true. Some mammals do have navels. Now, if you had said, "Some mammals do not have navels" or "Not all mammals have navels", then I could agree with you.

Yes, yes, totally correct. And of course I can't cover myself with some sort of "Well, you knew what I meant" defense since, to do so, would simply add support to those greengrocers who insist on selling "apple's."

The two navel-less mammals are the duck-billed platypus and the somewhat related echidna, both of which are hatched from eggs. The fact that they are classified as mammals ranks right up there with "fire" being a one-syllable word -- I don't understand it but, thank you anyway, I'll accept both to be true without the benefit of the lengthly explanations that I'm sure many of you would be all too happy to inflict on me.

Semi-related sidenote: An old joke, supposedly born of an actual classroom situation, revolves around a teacher asking a student for the precise definition of the word "mammal." The student (not the brightest penny in the pile) replied "It has hair... And it gives milk..." before faltering which prompted the teacher to reply "Well, so far you haven't eliminated the coconut!"

In yet another example of wanderingthreaditis, we've started out with words describing lint and now find ourselves deeply into zoology (pronounced zoe- [not zoo-] OL-o-gee, by the way) but such is life.

Confirmation please - Kangaroos etc, even though they are fed within the mother's pouch after their birth, are of course fed by the mother internally before that time. This would imply that they too have navels, yes? Tinman's referenced site implies that this is not the case.

I've never had the opportunity to closely examine Australian marsupials myself (that, along with making love with Britney Spears, are my two great unfulfilled fantasies) so any clarification from fellow Wordcrafters would be appreciated if only to satisfy my never-ending quest for generally useless knowledge. So, has anyone been in close contact with a kangaroo or koala? Or, for that matter, has anyone here made love with Britney?

quote:Confirmation please - Kangaroos etc, even though they are fed within the mother's pouch after their birth, are of course fed by the mother internally before that time. This would imply that they too have navels, yes?

Well, I haven't been close to a marsupial, either, to look for a navel (nor to Brittany; much thanks to Arnie for the confirmation! ).

However, this Web Site indicates that they may have a navel. While their gestation time is very short, the mother has a "yolk-type placenta". I guess it all depends on what that means.

Quite right. There is a book called There is No Zoo in Zoology by Charles H. Elster (Collier Books, 1988)

quote:This would imply that they too have navels, yes?

No. The placenta in placental mammals (true mammals or eutherians) supplies nourishment to the embryo during the long gestation period. The embryo is connected to the placenta by an umbilical cord. When this cord is severed in the newborn baby, the resulting scar is called the umbilicus, navel, or belly button. Wikipedia explains it better.

Marsupials have a short gestation period, and the embryo receives its nourishment from a yolk sac placenta. Apparently this yolk sac placenta is attached to the mother but not to the embryo, and the nourishment is absorbed (through diffusion?) directly rather than through an umbilical cord. Since the marsupial has no umbilical cord it can’t have a belly button. See marsupial in Wikipedia.

"REPRODUCTION "Like all marsupials, kangaroos lack a true placenta, the structure in a pregnant female's womb that provides nutrients for and removes waste from the growing embryo. Instead of a fully developed placenta, kangaroo females form a type of yolk sac in the womb. The embryo absorbs nutrients from this yolk sac for four to five weeks and then emerges from the birth canal, still in an embryo-like form but with well-developed forelimbs."

“These early explorers and naturalists were even more at a loss regarding the opossum's reproductive nature. The penis of the male opossum is bifurcated or forked. This, combined with the female opossum's prenatal habit of licking her belly, nipples and pouch area, led to the folktale that in reproducing, the male and female have sex through the female's nose and she then blows the young into her pouch. Later, it was discovered that the females have a bifurcated reproductive track and all the preening is done to create a moist warm pathway for the newborns to follow.”

I learnt yesterday from an article in the "Radio Times" (arguably on of the UK's best written magazines and the one with fewest typographical and grammatical errors) that oral sex is illegal in many US States.

This was in a commentary about a programme covering the activities of a British laywer who specialises in trying to gain revokation of the death penalty imposed on many US offenders, who, as we know, often languish on Death Row for many years.

He deals only in this area - with two exceptions:

Firstly he is acting for the British suspects currently incarcerated in Guantanimo Bay by the US military and secondly he defends those accused of having oral sex in those US States that prohibit it!

I have to say that I was quite amazed to learn that such a common and accepted practice could be considered a crime - but then, who am I to try to fathom the minds of legislators?

I recently found that out myself, as well. Like you, I was stunned. It seems as though I may have posted about it somewhere here, but I can't find it now.

This thread has definitely taken a twist! Tinman, thanks for the elucidation about "yolk-type placentas." I hadn't heard of them before.

I continue to look through my word books to find that word, which I know exists, for navel lint. In the process, I have found some great words though! In the "Bodily Processes and Characteristics" chapter of the written "Grandiloquent Dictionary" I like hobbledehoy or an adolescent boy who is awkward or clumsy; a stipling. Then in "Depraved and Insulting English" there is cacocallia which means a state of being ugly but sexy. My best bet is probably Elster's "There's a Word for It!", but I've not found it yet....

quote:Originally posted by Kalleh:Hilarious, Hab! Now, if only we had the word for it....

Tinman, no, they don't have veterinary nurses; just veterinary _technicians_. And, God help anyone who would call a nurse a _technician_!

[This message was edited by Kalleh on Tue Sep 2nd, 2003 at 9:23.]

Here in Aotearoa, they are most definitely called veterinary nurses - I have interviewed several of them in my work, and I have never yet had one describe herself (so far I have only encountered females in this occupation) as a veterinary technician. Each said, when asked her occupation, "veterinary nurse."

Do you know their education? I am assuming it is the same as our technicians.

The problem with the word "nurse" is that its etymology is from a Latin word "nutricius", meaning that suckles. It is certainly not an academic word; its synonyms revolve around nurture. Therefore, nurse is often used quite freely, thus confusing patients.

In fact, there has been talk in the U.S. of changing the word for nurse to something else, nurse being defined as one who receives a college degree from a nursing program. I wonder if there is precedent for changing the longtime name of a profession?

Yes, I think we used to have chiropodists, too! I had forgotten all about them. Were they exactly the same as podiatrists? I ask because I looked "chiropodist" up in dictionary.com, and it said that they "especially remove bunions and corns" for one of the definitions.

quote: You did post on July 5 about a Texas law outlawing ownership of six dildos. I guess five is ok.

There's very good reason why a woman can't own six--if I had another one, I wouldn't be on the internet, now would I? All commerce would cease to exist...packs of men would roam the streets wondering where the women went..

Kalleh mentioned "a Texas law I read about last week: owning 6 dildos is a felony!" Tinman observed, "I guess five is ok," and Winterbranch wondered, "How many dildoes is a man allowed to own?"

Your intrepid researcher reviewed the aptly named Penal Code.

Men are targeted too, for an "obscene device" is one "designed primarily for stimulation of the human genitals". It specifically includes artificial vaginas as well as dildos. (The generality presumably also includes vibrators. But take comfort in knowing that non-genital devices, such as harnesses and nipple clamps, seem unaffected.) §43.21(a)(7)

You can't "promote" -- that is, sell -- even one of them. Sale is a felony if at wholesale, §43.23(a), (b), and a misdemeanor if at retail, §43.23(c)(1)&2, (d). ---> Caution: don't think you may acquire a dozen elsewhere and bring them to Texas as gifts for friends there. The law says you may not "promote", which includes "distribute" as well as "sell".

Though you may not sell or otherwise "promote," nothing bars you from possessing as many as you like. However, having a stock of six or more raises the presumption that you intend to "promote". §43.23(f). It says "presumed," implying that you one may rebut the presumption.

CYA note: the author is not licensed to practice law in Texas, and expresses his interpretation solely as a lay person, not to be relied upon as legal advice.

I just read an article about a plastic surgeon, Dr. Charles Puckett, who reconstructs navels (umbilicoplasty), usually as part of a tummy tuck (Puckett tuck?) on his patients. He and his colleagues decided to determine the characteristics of the "ideal umbilicus". They took close-up photos of over 100 female volunteers, then convened a panel to rate them for attractiveness.

The result: "Bellybuttons should be relatively small, the study found. Outies are out, and so are large or distorted umbilci. Vertical navels are favored over horizontal ones. The right amount of 'hooding,' the fold of skin at the top of a navel, is another plus."

Dr. Puckett summed up: "If you have a basically attractive abdomen with an unattractive umbilicus, it kind of stands out like a sore thumb".

Umbilicus, sore thumb?

It sounds like there's a poem in here, somewhere. Anyone up to the challenge? (Let's see, now. What rhymes with Puckett?)

We could also do our own research. Just post a photo of your bellybutton ...

quote:Originally posted by tinman:Quite right. There is a book called _There is No Zoo in Zoology_ by Charles H. Elster (Collier Books, 1988)There is also the book "There is No Cow in Moscow" along similar lines. I own a copy of both.

quote:This would imply that they too have navels, yes?

No. The placenta in placental mammals (true mammals or eutherians) supplies nourishment to the embryo during the long gestation period. Verrry interesting stuff and far more than I wanted to know about marsupials. (Possums can have up to 17 nipples - I'm a leg man myself.) I consider myself enriched and I give you my sincere thanks. No, really. (I sound sarcastic but I swear this isn't the case!)

I have often said that if I were ever to win one of the larger lotteries, one of the first things I would do would be to have my navel filled in and surgically covered over with a skin graft. Why? To freak out people on the beach, natch.

quote:Originally posted by Richard English:I learnt yesterday from an article in the "Radio Times" (arguably on of the UK's best written magazines and the one with fewest typographical and grammatical errors) that oral sex is illegal in many US States.

This is old news but just slightly. The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that it was unconstitutional for the police to arrest two gay men for engaging in oral sex in the privacy of their own home. This apparently gives the rest of us the green light as well.

As far as I'm concerned, whatever (1.) consenting (2.) adults do in (3.) privacy should be no one's damn business but their own. Satisfy those three constraints and whatever you want is fine by me!

quote:Originally posted by WinterBranch:I would like to point out--that you can buy all this stuff over the counter and quite easily here in Texas. However, they are "adult novelties" and "gag gifts".

"Spencer's" is a nation-wide chain of stores, usually found in malls, that sells some of the most outrageous "adult novelties" over here, all fully functional and produced to enhance the sexuality of a wide variety of the, shall we say, orgasm-impaired.

I was once in a Spencer's when I was approached by a woman who mistakenly took me for one of the store's employees. She asked me a technical question regarding a vibrator she had in her hand and, without missing a beat, I called out in a loud and clear voice "Customer needs assistance with dildoes! Customer needs assistance with the dildoes, please!"

quote:" ... ... all fully functional and produced to enhance the sexuality of a wide variety of the, shall we say, orgasm-impaired.

"I was once in a Spencer's ..... ....... without missing a beat ...."

Belonging to this community is a broadening enlightening educational experience. Some of us, fortunate enough to be unimpaired in that area, had never heard of Spencer's, nor their appliances and services, until you brought it up, so to speak, C.J.

Yes, you are correct, the basic difference is a simple one. Vibrators vibrate (D'uh!) and dildoes don't. BUT!! Your question brings up another aspect of this story that allows me to bring it around to the primary purpose of this board - various aspects of the English language.

Both items were present in the section we were standing in at the time so both "Customer needs attention with the vibrators" and "Customer needs attention with the dildoes" would have worked. The difference is that the word "dildoes" contains two D's and, as such, is an inherently funnier word than "vibrators."

Huge studies have been made in this area, many of which extoll the comedic virtues of the letters "P" and "K." "Pot roast" is funnier than "roast beef." "Pickle" is funnier than "Gramma died" etc etc etc.

And what I didn't mention in the story was that, for some now-forgotten reason, I had been under the impression that I would be able to get away with that line without the woman pressing charges. I was right and both she and the friend she was with laughed out loud at my, shall we say, indelicate request for assistance. And despite my best efforts to offer a personal alternative to the purchase in question, no, I went home alone.

Since this seems to be our "official" dildo thread, I have to post about a synonym for dildo that I found while reading "Lysistrata": godemiche. Now, that is a more sophisticated word, isn't it? It even sounds a bit regal!

quote: Since this seems to be our "official" dildo thread, I have to post about a synonym for dildo that I found while reading "Lysistrata": godemiche. Now, that is a more sophisticated word, isn't it? It even sounds a bit regal!

Of course, I had to google that word. Evidently, I'm set for a trip to France! I now know how to ask for the restroom and the correct word for dildo!